smallman
Joined: Sep 24, 2007
|
 Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 02:03 |
 
|
I generally find the box to schedule games quite nicely.
Occassionally the box does appear to have a severe fart and does some crazy pairings. I remember one pairing of my fairly rookie skaven around 130 TS got paired up vs 200ish TS claw/rsc chaos and I got naturally creamed. I always activate many teams, and had teams much closer in range of this chaos team.
Just noticed similar wierdness in some current box games:
Gitans des mers magikmoon (150.84) (128/115) Skaven 5 - 0 Chaos (119/95) (148.3 MrBadExample Glory of Om
ultrabad Armageddon Bound (164.71) (191/181) Chaos 2 - 0 Undead (135/123) (166.91) Loew BlackBoxed Elfs
Fatter Astronaughts Slex (153.79) (170/145) Ogre 0 - 2 Orc (175/168) (165.71) Mistabasten Petalaorcogoneta
Dreams of Glory uzkulak (159.3) (210/196) Dwarf 0 - 0 Orc (213/190) (155.62) speedypman Greenish Grumpies
Why was a 181 TS chaos team paired with 123 TS undead
Why was a 145 TS ogre team paired with 168 TS orc
surely 181 pairs with 168, and 123 pairs with 145 better.
Would have meant out of these 2 pairings a TS difference of only 13+22=35 compared to the original 58+23=81
It's a shame the box can't handle less than 6 teams, especially since it is very often that there are 4 or 5 activated. I'm hoping both these issue can be corrected at the same time  |
|
|
Kryten
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
|
smallman
Joined: Sep 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 02:16 |
|
ah k woops, guess my example is no good lol, would still be great if box could schedule atleast 1 game out of 4 or 5 coaches. |
|
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 05:11 |
|
Appears your playing style isn't all that's "slow".
__Synn |
|
|
Sionis
Joined: Aug 26, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 05:33 |
|
Sadly 6 is the magic number and that's just how it is. |
Last edited by Sionis on %b %17, %2009 - %09:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
smallman
Joined: Sep 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 05:47 |
|
It is easily rectified with some additional code. I am an extremely novice programmer, but I would be surprised if it would be hard to add something along the lines of:
if players activated =3 or 4 or 5 then execute a routine that shedules 1 game with the closest TS pairing. No programmer is going to bother if I'm the only one that wants this to happen though.
Blackbox would thrive much better if people were not constantly getting no games due to not reaching 6. It would also encourage better racial diversity, as you are more likely to get paired up the more teams you activate.
I rarely bother activating in the 6 hour off peak timeslot anymore, even thought its my prefered time to play, the odds of it reaching 6 is too slim. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 05:52 |
|
| Synn wrote: | Appears your playing style isn't all that's "slow".
__Synn |
|
|
|
jarvis_pants
Joined: Oct 30, 2008
|
i still think that it should be minimum number of teams activated not number of coaches. Think about it sumbody wants to get a match but there needs to be 20 teams activated what are they more likely to do activate 1 chaos team or 5-6 teams hopefully different races then even 2 coaches could play. |
_________________
"May Nuffle have mercy on your rolls." - St.Basher |
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 08:49 |
|
don't you guys wanna at least post the suitability aswell?
it's not really informative what the bot thought about those... |
|
|
spubbbba
Joined: Jul 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 09:48 |
|
| smallman wrote: | I generally find the box to schedule games quite nicely.
Occassionally the box does appear to have a severe fart and does some crazy pairings. I remember one pairing of my fairly rookie skaven around 130 TS got paired up vs 200ish TS claw/rsc chaos and I got naturally creamed. I always activate many teams, and had teams much closer in range of this chaos team. |
Did you mean this game?
You were 22TS down but did get 2 handicaps so not that terrible a match up really. |
_________________
British or British based and looking to join a League?
Then check out theWhite Isle Fringe |
|
Sionis
Joined: Aug 26, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 10:05 |
|
I'd ask about the outcome of said match given who the casualties were. |
|
|
Timlagor
Joined: Feb 13, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 10:14 |
|
I like the idea of scheduling with fewer active coaches if possible.
Three ways to do it:
- schedule but only games of >950 (or some other number) compatibility happen
- schedule based on number of teams activated (this isn't entirely great as the teams are not independent)
- schedule fewer games (1 game for 4 or 5 coaches)
..or some combination of those.
The one drawback I can see to scheduling just 1 game with 4-5 coaches is that those two coaches won't be around for the next one. OTOH one game is better than none and there is no guarantee that the next one would be any better. I'd definitely prefer to see something happening myself. |
_________________
Time for a new .sig |
|
Calthor
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2009 - 10:41 |
|
| Timlagor wrote: | I like the idea of scheduling with fewer active coaches if possible.
Three ways to do it:
- schedule but only games of >950 (or some other number) compatibility happen
- schedule based on number of teams activated (this isn't entirely great as the teams are not independent)
- schedule fewer games (1 game for 4 or 5 coaches)
..or some combination of those.
The one drawback I can see to scheduling just 1 game with 4-5 coaches is that those two coaches won't be around for the next one. OTOH one game is better than none and there is no guarantee that the next one would be any better. I'd definitely prefer to see something happening myself. |
I'd say combine all three of those factors for when the coaches are below the number of 6 and that would pretty much rule out fears of cheating/cherrypicking/you-know-what. So yeah, seconded! |
|
|
Shades_SteelFist
Joined: Sep 11, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 28, 2009 - 23:46 |
|
Id just like to know how this match up makes sense
[21:59] <BowlBot> - Shades_SteelFist vs FMSTAN (Lizardmen 102/97 vs 129/109 Khemri) @924
[21:59] <BowlBot> - nimrodel vs Espionage (Amazon 100/92 vs 124/108 Lizardmen) @937
How the hell I get Khemri over 25 TR above me when theres a rookie Zon team right by my current TR/TS and another Lizard team right near the Khem I play in terms off TR/TS,
Why the hell did I get the Khemri and not the Zons, Makes no sense at all to me and resulted in another 2 Perms to Sauraus as a result of this complete shambles of a match up,
Can anybody please explain this as Im very confuse and slightly pissed off about it. |
_________________
Nuffle is cruel but we love him still |
|
Woodstock
Joined: Dec 11, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 28, 2009 - 23:52 |
|
TR/TS is not the only thing that determines the matchup. Check how the system works before you complain. |
|
|
|
|
Vamps win another ma...
Search
